Paul Coebergh van den Braak

Chairman, BUSINESSEUROPE WG on Free Movement of Goods

Also

Philips - IP&S

Business views on Safety and Surveillance package

P Coebergh van den Braak 2013-05-29

Package benefits to be preserved

• Pursuit for safe and compliant products• Simpler, clearer and more consistent legal

framework on product safety and market surveillance

• Should lead to – lower compliance cost– better enforcement, giving

a level playing field and fewer non-compliant products

MSR scope and definitions

• Good to cover not only safety but product compliance aspects for all public interests

• Necessary to distinguish – Safety risk from other non-conformity issues

calling everything “risk” will cause confusion– Various degrees of safety risk

magnitude, likelihood– Material from formal non-compliance

less severe measures for paperwork-only issues

What is a risky product?

• Now: multiple interpretations• Example: lighter model – Greece NL • Good measures to improve:

– Risk assessment – first check compliance with harmonized requirements and standards

– Cross-border co-op, EU level assessments review– Business input in EU MS-Forum will help

• But option for action upon a risk despite presumed conformity = legal uncertainty– Proportionality and burden of proof!– Effective appeal procedures essential

Towards a stronger surveillance system

• Lack of financial resources: need for– Political will (MS’s)– Good organization, facilities, competent officers

• Authorities must know and apply the law• Good: more horizontal co-op and border controls• Shared labs: clarify role; subject to accreditation• Border controls: no unnecessary hold up

• Fees and penalties: caution– Target rogue traders, not bona fide players– No incentives for unjustified controls or actions!– Penalties: proportionate, dissuasive, focus on real,

harmful non-compliance

Concerns

• We hear suggestions to introduce more third party certification– Should not become broadly mandatory for products– Costly but will not contribute to more compliance:

• Will be forged, burden lands on the good players• Creates more unlevel playing field • No replacement for surveillance and enforcement

• Commissions implementing powers– Anchor transparancy and stakeholder consultation

in the legal text